It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ShadesofGrey
This may seem like a stupid question but can anyone explain exactly why Global Warming is bad for the planet and humanity?
Supercharger Disadvantages
Best of Both Worlds
Volkswagen has recently released a "Twincharger" engine on a Golf GT. The Twincharger comes with both a supercharger and a turbocharger. At low engine RPM, the supercharger blasts air into the cylinders to enhance low-end torque. At high RPM, when exhaust gases have been produced in sufficient quantity, the turbocharger kicks in to increase top-end performance. The GT, which is available only in Europe, hits 62 miles per hour in 7.9 seconds. It can also reach 136 miles per hour while still delivering 39 miles per gallon.
The biggest disadvantage of superchargers is also their defining characteristic: Because the crankshaft drives them, they must steal some of the engine's horsepower. A supercharger can consume as much as 20 percent of an engine's total power output. But because a supercharger can generate as much as 46 percent additional horsepower, most think the trade-off is worth it.
Supercharging puts an added strain on the engine, which needs to be strong to handle the extra boost and bigger explosions. Most manufacturers account for this by specifying heavy-duty components when they design an engine intended for supercharged use. This makes the vehicle more expensive. Superchargers also cost more to maintain, and most manufacturers suggest high-octane premium-grade gas.
Despite their disadvantages, superchargers are still the most cost-effective way to increase horsepower. Superchargers can result in power increases of 50 to 100 percent, making them great for racing, towing heavy loads or just adding excitement to the typical driving experience.
To learn more about superchargers and related topics, check out the links on the next page.
Plus they go at speeds we just do not need or use. Cars should all be governed imo to about 70 mph. there’s just no need for speed for the average Joe in his car. Less speed also means less pollution and more importantly more lives saved.
Originally posted by AlphaAnuOmega
Supercharger not electronic, my bad, belt driven.
Both consume more gasoline. That is the point, to burn more gasoline. Upon take-off, they consume more gasoline. If you are not racing a car, there is no point in having a turbocharge for efficiency, it only allows for more gas consumption
Supercharger Disadvantages
Best of Both Worlds
Volkswagen has recently released a "Twincharger" engine on a Golf GT. The Twincharger comes with both a supercharger and a turbocharger. At low engine RPM, the supercharger blasts air into the cylinders to enhance low-end torque. At high RPM, when exhaust gases have been produced in sufficient quantity, the turbocharger kicks in to increase top-end performance. The GT, which is available only in Europe, hits 62 miles per hour in 7.9 seconds. It can also reach 136 miles per hour while still delivering 39 miles per gallon.
The biggest disadvantage of superchargers is also their defining characteristic: Because the crankshaft drives them, they must steal some of the engine's horsepower. A supercharger can consume as much as 20 percent of an engine's total power output. But because a supercharger can generate as much as 46 percent additional horsepower, most think the trade-off is worth it.
Supercharging puts an added strain on the engine, which needs to be strong to handle the extra boost and bigger explosions. Most manufacturers account for this by specifying heavy-duty components when they design an engine intended for supercharged use. This makes the vehicle more expensive. Superchargers also cost more to maintain, and most manufacturers suggest high-octane premium-grade gas.
Despite their disadvantages, superchargers are still the most cost-effective way to increase horsepower. Superchargers can result in power increases of 50 to 100 percent, making them great for racing, towing heavy loads or just adding excitement to the typical driving experience.
To learn more about superchargers and related topics, check out the links on the next page.
auto.howstuffworks.com...
Originally posted by AlphaAnuOmega
The point I was making was that turbochargers consume more gasoline and are not fuel efficient, hence the racing aspect. Fuel efficient for racing but not everyday driving. Turbocharges are impractical as far as consumer cars are concerned. They consume more gasoline than a naturally aspirated engine.
Originally posted by ressiv
spOOner:
even youknow that you can proof anything these day's no matter wat....
where you must look at is who is paying for the investigation..couse his opinion will be the outcome of it..for example:
a telephone comp. will do everything to proof that the radiation of phone transmitters is not a danger to humans....
Originally posted by Royal76
We already get blamed for everything.
Originally posted by Johnmike
it's not proven that humans are the cause.
Originally posted by sp00ner
Originally posted by Johnmike
it's not proven that humans are the cause.
Exactly... and why act when it's only a 90% probabilty...
"Sir... you have cancer. You have a 90% chance to die without treatment.... "
"Oh! Man, and I was worred about dying..."
"Sir, if you try to swin across the channel, you have a 90% chance of dying..."
"Ok, well that's nothing to fear...."
Right... why act when there's the tiniest chance that you can completly deny it...
Originally posted by kleverone
Here is an article that that discusses our level of ignorance as a nation when it comes to global warming. It doesn't help when your president doens't want to be bothered with little things like global warming! He's a War president anyway
Global warming is here and denying it will not make it go away.